Steroid Therapy and Outcome of Parapneumonic Pleural Effusions (STOPPE): A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Pleural effusion commonly complicates community-acquired pneumonia and is associated with intense pleural inflammation. Whether antiinflammatory treatment with corticosteroids improves outcomes is unknown. Objectives: To assess the effects of corticosteroids in an adult population with pneumonia-related pleural effusion. Methods: The STOPPE (Steroid Therapy and Outcome of Parapneumonic Pleural Effusions) trial was a pilot, multicenter, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, randomized trial involving six Australian centers. Patients with community-acquired pneumonia and pleural effusion were randomized (2:1) to intravenous dexamethasone (4 mg twice daily for 48 h) or placebo and followed for 30 days. Given the diverse effects of corticosteroids, a comprehensive range of clinical, serological, and imaging outcomes were assessed in this pilot trial (ACTRN12618000947202). Measurements and Main Results: Eighty patients were randomized (one withdrawn before treatment) and received dexamethasone (n = 51) or placebo (n = 28). This pilot trial found no preliminary evidence of benefits of dexamethasone in improving time to sustained (>12 h) normalization of vital signs (temperature, oxygen saturations, blood pressure, heart, and respiratory rates): median, 41.0 (95% confidence interval, 32.3-54.5) versus 27.8 (15.4-49.5) hours in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.729 [95% confidence interval, 0.453-1.173]; P = 0.193). Similarly, no differences in C-reactive protein or leukocyte counts were observed, except for a higher leukocyte count in the dexamethasone group at Day 3. Pleural drainage procedures were performed in 49.0% of dexamethasone-treated and 42.9% of placebo-treated patients (P = 0.60). Radiographic pleural opacification decreased over time with no consistent intergroup differences. Mean duration of antibiotic therapy (22.4 [SD, 15.4] vs. 20.4 [SD, 13.8] d) and median hospitalization (6.0 [interquartile range, 5.0-10.0] vs. 5.5 [interquartile range, 5.0-8.0] d) were similar between the dexamethasone and placebo groups. Serious adverse events occurred in 25.5% of dexamethasone-treated and 21.4% of placebo-treated patients. Transient hyperglycemia more commonly affected the dexamethasone group (15.6% vs. 7.1%). Conclusions: Systemic corticosteroids showed no preliminary benefits in adults with parapneumonic effusions. Clinical trial registered with www.anzctr.org.au (ACTRN12618000947202).

Concurrent carbogen and nicotinamide with radiation therapy in muscle invasive bladder cancer: A report on feasibility in the Australian setting.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of bladder cancer increases with age, and elderly patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) are significantly undertreated. Bladder preservation trimodality therapy (BPTT) is an alternative to radical cystectomy in the curative setting. The use of concurrent carbogen and nicotinamide (CON) with radiation therapy (RT) as radiosensitisers have shown significant improvement in the overall survival and local relapse in the UK BCON Trial and is part of the standard of care for patients with MIBC in the UK. This is the first study in the Australian setting to demonstrate the feasibility in setting up a CON radiation oncology department. METHODS: Based on the UK BCON trial, circuit systems for carbogen gas delivery were set up in consultation with the anaesthetics and respiratory teams. TGA exemption was obtained for 98% oxygen and 2% carbon dioxide carbogen gas mixture and delivery apparatus for each patient. Seven patients with histological locally advanced bladder cancer were recruited into this study. RESULTS: The establishment of a CON department took approximately 24 months. Development of trial protocol was based on the equipment availability in Australia and proper transport, storage and handling of the equipment was guided by local occupational, health and safety (OHS) regulations. All patients received full of dose of CON. Increased urinary frequency, urgency and diarrhoea were the most commonly reported acute bladder and bowel toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study in Australia to demonstrate the feasibility of concurrent CON with radiation therapy. It is a safe and cost-effective treatment that provides a new therapeutic option in the treatment of patients with MIBC, particularly those with limited treatment options.

A Randomized Controlled Trial on Optimal Sampling Sequence in Radial Guide Sheath Endobronchial Ultrasound Lung Biopsy.

BACKGROUND: An optimal sampling sequence in radial guide sheath endobronchial ultrasound lung biopsy (R-EBUS) is unclear. This prospective single-center pilot randomized controlled trial aimed to determine if the initial method and sequence of sampling affect the diagnostic accuracy of the procedure. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing R-EBUS for lesions >15 mm with a bronchus sign were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to biopsy first (group A), brushings first (group B) or combination (group C). The primary outcome was a positive diagnosis from any sampling method. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients were randomized. The overall diagnostic yield of the procedure was 77.8% (95% confidence interval: 66%-89%), with no difference between groups. A higher rate of positive cytology from brushings was seen if the biopsies were performed before brushings (77.8% in group A vs. 44.4% in group B, P=0.03). The rate of positive cytology from washings was higher if the washings were obtained just after the brushings (61.1% in group A vs. 11.1% in group B, P=0.02). There was no difference in the rate of positive biopsy histology in the groups (P=0.27). All 3 sampling modalities were more likely to be positive in group A (50.0% vs. 11.1% in group B and 22.2% in group C, P=0.04). Complications rate was low and not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: The overall rate of a positive R-EBUS procedure was not affected by the initial sampling method or sequence. However, all 3 sampling modalities were more likely to be positive if biopsies were performed first, followed by brushings and washings.

The Pleural Effusion And Symptom Evaluation (PLEASE) study of breathlessness in patients with a symptomatic pleural effusion.

INTRODUCTION: Pathophysiology changes associated with pleural effusion, its drainage and factors governing symptom response are poorly understood. Our objective was to determine: 1) the effect of pleural effusion (and its drainage) on cardiorespiratory, functional and diaphragmatic parameters; and 2) the proportion as well as characteristics of patients with breathlessness relief post-drainage. METHODS: Prospectively enrolled patients with symptomatic pleural effusions were assessed at both pre-therapeutic drainage and at 24-36 h post-therapeutic drainage. RESULTS: 145 participants completed pre-drainage and post-drainage tests; 93% had effusions ≥25% of hemithorax. The median volume drained was 1.68 L. Breathlessness scores improved post-drainage (mean visual analogue scale (VAS) score by 28.0±24 mm; dyspnoea-12 (D12) score by 10.5±8.8; resting Borg score before 6-min walk test (6-MWT) by 0.6±1.7; all p<0.0001). The 6-min walk distance (6-MWD) increased by 29.7±73.5 m, p<0.0001. Improvements in vital signs and spirometry were modest (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) by 0.22 L, 95% CI 0.18-0.27; forced vital capacity (FVC) by 0.30 L, 95% CI 0.24-0.37). The ipsilateral hemi-diaphragm was flattened/everted in 50% of participants pre-drainage and 48% of participants exhibited paradoxical or no diaphragmatic movement. Post-drainage, hemi-diaphragm shape and movement were normal in 94% and 73% of participants, respectively. Drainage provided meaningful breathlessness relief (VAS score improved ≥14 mm) in 73% of participants irrespective of whether the lung expanded (mean difference 0.14, 95% CI 10.02-0.29; p=0.13). Multivariate analyses found that breathlessness relief was associated with significant breathlessness pre-drainage (odds ratio (OR) 5.83 per standard deviation (sd) decrease), baseline abnormal/paralyzed/paradoxical diaphragm movement (OR 4.37), benign aetiology (OR 3.39), higher pleural pH (OR per sd increase 1.92) and higher serum albumin level (OR per sd increase 1.73). CONCLUSIONS: Breathlessness and exercise tolerance improved in most patients with only a small mean improvement in spirometry and no change in oxygenation. Breathlessness improvement was similar in participants with and without trapped lung. Abnormal hemi-diaphragm shape and movement were independently associated with relief of breathlessness post-drainage.

Aggressive versus symptom-guided drainage of malignant pleural effusion via indwelling pleural catheters (AMPLE-2): an open-label randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Indwelling pleural catheters are an established management option for malignant pleural effusion and have advantages over talc slurry pleurodesis. The optimal regimen of drainage after indwelling pleural catheter insertion is debated and ranges from aggressive (daily) drainage to drainage only when symptomatic. METHODS: AMPLE-2 was an open-label randomised trial involving 11 centres in Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, and Malaysia. Patients with symptomatic malignant pleural effusions were randomly assigned (1:1) to the aggressive (daily) or symptom-guided drainage groups for 60 days and minimised by cancer type (mesothelioma vs others), performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] score 0-1 vs ≥2), presence of trapped lung, and prior pleurodesis. Patients were followed up for 6 months. The primary outcome was mean daily breathlessness score, measured by use of a 100 mm visual analogue scale during the first 60 days. Secondary outcomes included rates of spontaneous pleurodesis and self-reported quality-of-life measures. Results were analysed by an intention-to-treat approach. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12615000963527. FINDINGS: Between July 20, 2015, and Jan 26, 2017, 87 patients were recruited and randomly assigned to the aggressive (n=43) or symptom-guided (n=44) drainage groups. The mean daily breathlessness scores did not differ significantly between the aggressive and symptom-guided drainage groups (geometric means 13·1 mm [95% CI 9·8-17·4] vs 17·3 mm [13·0-22·0]; ratio of geometric means 1·32 [95% CI 0·88-1·97]; p=0·18). More patients in the aggressive group developed spontaneous pleurodesis than in the symptom-guided group in the first 60 days (16 [37·2%] of 43 vs five [11·4%] of 44, p=0·0049) and at 6 months (19 [44·2%] vs seven [15·9%], p=0·004; hazard ratio 3·287 [95% CI 1·396-7·740]; p=0·0065). Patient-reported quality-of-life measures, assessed with EuroQoL-5 Dimensions-5 Levels (EQ-5D-5L), were better in the aggressive group than in the symptom-guided group (estimated means 0·713 [95% CI 0·647-0·779] vs 0·601 [0·536-0·667]). The estimated difference in means was 0·112 (95% CI 0·0198-0·204; p=0·0174). Pain scores, total days spent in hospital, and mortality did not differ significantly between groups. Serious adverse events occurred in 11 (25·6%) of 43 patients in the aggressive drainage group and in 12 (27·3%) of 44 patients in the symptom-guided drainage group, including 11 episodes of pleural infection in nine patients (five in the aggressive group and six in the symptom-guided drainage group). INTERPRETATION: We found no differences between the aggressive (daily) and the symptom-guided drainage regimens for indwelling pleural catheters in providing breathlessness control. These data indicate that daily indwelling pleural catheter drainage is more effective in promoting spontaneous pleurodesis and might improve quality of life. FUNDING: Cancer Council of Western Australia and the Sir Charles Gairdner Research Advisory Group.

Protocol of the PLeural Effusion And Symptom Evaluation (PLEASE) study on the pathophysiology of breathlessness in patients with symptomatic pleural effusions.

INTRODUCTION: Pleural effusion is a common clinical problem that can complicate many medical conditions. Breathlessness is the most common symptom of pleural effusion of any cause and the most common reason for pleural drainage. However, improvement in breathlessness following drainage of an effusion is variable; some patients experience either no benefit or a worsening of their breathlessness. The physiological mechanisms underlying breathlessness in patients with a pleural effusion are unclear and likely to be multifactorial with patient-related and effusion-related factors contributing. A comprehensive study of the physiological and symptom responses to drainage of pleural effusions may provide a clearer understanding of these mechanisms, and may identify predictors of benefit from drainage. The ability to identify those patients whose breathlessness will (or will not) improve after pleural fluid drainage can help avoid unnecessary pleural drainage procedures, their associated morbidities and costs. The PLeural Effusion And Symptom Evaluation (PLEASE) study is a prospective study to comprehensively evaluate factors contributing to pleural effusion-related breathlessness. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The PLEASE study is a single-centre prospective study of 150 patients with symptomatic pleural effusions that require therapeutic drainage. The study aims to identify key factors that underlie breathlessness in patients with pleural effusions and develop predictors of improvement in breathlessness following effusion drainage. Participants will undergo evaluation pre-effusion and post-effusion drainage to assess their level of breathlessness at rest and during exercise, respiratory and other physiological responses as well as respiratory muscle mechanics. Pre-drainage and post-drainage parameters will be collected and compared to identify the key factors and mechanisms that correlate with improvement in breathlessness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approved by the Sir Charles Gairdner Group Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC number 2014-079). Registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000820404). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12616000820404; Pre-results.

Protocol of the Australasian Malignant Pleural Effusion-2 (AMPLE-2) trial: a multicentre randomised study of aggressive versus symptom-guided drainage via indwelling pleural catheters.

INTRODUCTION: Malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) can complicate most cancers, causing dyspnoea and impairing quality of life (QoL). Indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) are a novel management approach allowing ambulatory fluid drainage and are increasingly used as an alternative to pleurodesis. IPC drainage approaches vary greatly between centres. Some advocate aggressive (usually daily) removal of fluid to provide best symptom control and chance of spontaneous pleurodesis. Daily drainages however demand considerably more resources and may increase risks of complications. Others believe that MPE care is palliative and drainage should be performed only when patients become symptomatic (often weekly to monthly). Identifying the best drainage approach will optimise patient care and healthcare resource utilisation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, open-label randomised trial. Patients with MPE will be randomised 1:1 to daily or symptom-guided drainage regimes after IPC insertion. Patient allocation to groups will be stratified for the cancer type (mesothelioma vs others), performance status (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status 0-1 vs ≥2), presence of trapped lung (vs not) and prior pleurodesis (vs not). The primary outcome is the mean daily dyspnoea score, measured by a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) over the first 60 days. Secondary outcomes include benefits on physical activity levels, rate of spontaneous pleurodesis, complications, hospital admission days, healthcare costs and QoL measures. Enrolment of 86 participants will detect a mean difference of VAS score of 14 mm between the treatment arms (5% significance, 90% power) assuming a common between-group SD of 18.9 mm and a 10% lost to follow-up rate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Sir Charles Gairdner Group Human Research Ethics Committee has approved the study (number 2015-043). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12615000963527; Pre-results.

Current controversies in the management of malignant pleural effusions.

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) can complicate most malignancies and is a common clinical problem presenting to respiratory and cancer care physicians. Despite its frequent occurrence, current knowledge of MPE remains limited and controversy surrounds almost every aspect in its diagnosis and management. A lack of robust data has led to significant practice variations worldwide, inefficiencies in healthcare provision, and threats to patient safety. Recent studies have highlighted evolving concepts in MPE care that challenge traditional beliefs. Advancing laboratory techniques have improved the diagnostic yield from pleural fluid cytology, minimizing the need for invasive tissue biopsies, even in many cases of mesothelioma. Imaging-guided biopsy is comparable to thoracoscopy in suitable patients, if cytological examination was noncontributory. Cumulating evidence for the benefits of indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) has led some centers to adopt this approach as first-line definitive management for MPE over conventional talc pleurodesis. The optimal technique of talc pleurodesis is still debated despite its use for many decades. Strategies combining pleurodesis and IPC are being studied. MPE consists of a heterogenous group of diseases and careful phenotyping of malignant effusion patients can provide important clinical information that will advance the field and allow better stratification of patients and planning of therapy accordingly. This review addresses the controversies in MPE diagnosis and management and exposes the deficits in knowledge of MPE that should be the focus of future research.